P.S. Docket No. DCA 19-159


December 20, 2019

In the Matter of the Debt Collection Act Petition

DANIKA HODGES v UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

P.S. Docket No. DCA 19-159

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER
Danika Hodges, pro se

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT
DeAngela Carr
Labor Relations Specialist

FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982

This matter involved a question as to whether Respondent United States Postal Service improperly withheld money from Petitioner Danika Hodges’ salary in repayment for a salary advance.  A hearing was held in Oakland, California.  The following facts are based on the record.

FINDINGS OF FACT

  1. At all relevant times, Petitioner was employed by Respondent (Tr. 80).
  2. On December 28, 2018, Petitioner received two salary advances for pay periods 25 and 26 of 2018 (Resp. Exh. 5).
  3. Petitioner executed an AdjustPay Certification form acknowledging receipt of the payments (Id.). 
  4. The first salary advance was in the amount of $480.74 for Week 1 and $446.95 for Week 2 of pay period 25 of 2018, which was rounded to $930 (Id.; Tr. 42).
  5. The second salary advance was for $446.95 for Week 1 and $326.50 for Week 2 of pay period 26 of 2018, which was rounded to $775 (Resp. Exh. 5; Tr. 74).
  6. In pay period 1 of 2019, Respondent offset Petitioner’s salary in the amount of $930 as repayment for the salary advance for pay period 25 of 2018 and Petitioner received the balance of her salary (Resp. Exh. 1; Tr. 31-32, 45-48). 
  7. In pay period 3 of 2019, Respondent offset Petitioner’s salary in the amount of $775 as repayment for the salary advance for pay period 26 of 2018 and Petitioner received the balance of her salary (Resp. Exh. 2; Tr. 40, 73-74).

DECISION

The receipt of the salary advances in question is not in dispute.1   Tr. 26.  Also, there is no dispute that Petitioner has repaid the salary advances in full when she received her subsequent paychecks.  Findings 6-7.  The only question at issue in this case is whether the Postal Service over withheld or improperly calculated the amounts due for repayment.  At the hearing, the Postal Service offered witnesses who presented detailed testimony as to how and when the advances occurred, and how and when the advances were repaid.  Findings 3-7.  The witnesses explained that the local managers do not have access to an employee’s withholding for various taxes and deductions, and they calculate the salary advance based upon 65% of the employee’s gross salary.  Tr. 18-24, 30, 35.  Putting aside the question of whether a salary advance may be collected without following the procedures set forth in the Debt Collection Act (DCA), I am satisfied that the Postal Service met its burden that the calculations of the salary advance and the repayment were accurate. 2  Petitioner offered no evidence to dispute the accuracy of the calculations.
The confusion on Petitioner’s part stems largely from the fact that the local manager calculates these salary advances but doesn’t offer the employee any record of that calculation.  Tr. 31-32.  An online form exists that the manager uses to enter specific information relative to the employee’s gross salary for that time period, and then calculates the amount due the employee as an advance on salary.  Tr. 25.  The manager then prints out the AdjustPay Certification form for the employee to sign but does not include the calculation page.  Tr. 75-76.  The calculation page is not kept as a record by the Postal Service, and thus was not presented in this case.  Id.
It is unfortunate that at the time of the salary advance, Petitioner was not given all the paperwork associated with the advance, so that she might understand how the advance was originally calculated.  This oversight created a misunderstanding that necessitated this hearing and review.  Nevertheless, the obligation of an employee to repay a salary advance exists when that employee signs the AdjustPay Certification form accepting the advance, and receives the money.  Once accepted, a salary advance must be repaid in a timely manner.  The language of the AdjustPay Certification signed by the employee describes the employee’s obligation for repayment.3
I hereby certify that I have received an emergency salary payment of the stated amount. I authorize the USPS to recover this amount upon receipt of the missing check or in the calculation of the salary check that reflects the appropriate adjustment or subsequent salary checks, as required, to satisfy the debt. The issue of whether the execution of an AdjustPay Certification form by the employee permits the Postal Service to offset an employee’s salary without compliance with the Debt Collection Act procedures, I will leave for another day.  However, even if the Postal Service violated proper procedures in its collection of this debt, the result here remains the same.  See, e.g., Robert Burkett, 1997 WL 35414647, DCA 96-22 (January 15, 1997).  Having carried its burden of proof, the Postal Service is entitled to judgment in its favor.

ORDER

The Petition is DENIED. As the debt at issue has been paid in full, no further action is necessary.

James G. Gilbert
Chief Administrative Law Judge

1 Apparently, Petitioner was injured on the job immediately after starting with USPS, and this injury caused a delay in her salary for the pay periods in question.  Tr. 8.  The parties use the term “salary advance” here, and I do as well for ease and consistency of reference, but it seems the “advances” were more for missed paychecks than an actual advance on salary.  Nevertheless, the reasons behind the missed payments are not relevant to the disposition of the case, nor is the terminology used by the parties.

2 Petitioner was never issued a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets for the collection of the salary advance.  I took jurisdiction because Petitioner alleged that the calculation of the debt was incorrect.  As this hearing offered Petitioner the due process required by the DCA, the issue of a failure to follow the DCA procedures is substantially moot.

3 PS Form 1608 is used for salary advances when an employee fails to receive a scheduled salary payment.  In this case, when a manager processes the request, an online form here referred to as an AdjustPay Certification is used.  I note that the language of the AdjustPay Certification form regarding the employee’s requirement for repayment differs substantially from that of PS Form 1608.  There is no explanation in the record for the differing language between the two forms, or why PS Form 1608 was not used in this instance.